'The Class War Has Begun'

[Number23]

'The Class War Has Begun'
Obama is waging it against the rich. The Republicans are waging it against the poor.
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2013/04/obama_s_2014_budget_obama_wants_to_soak_the_rich_to_help_the_poor_republicans.html

President Obama’s much delayed fiscal year 2014 budget is another salvo in D.C.’s endless war over taxes. Obama embraces both reductions in Medicare payments and a controversial cost-of-living formula to reduce Social Security benefits while demanding higher revenues. Republicans once again refuse to consider even a small amount of additional tax revenue as their side of a bargain.

But this superficial conflict about taxes hides a much more fundamental dispute about class warfare. The White House wants to substantially redistribute income downward, while the GOP wants to do just the reverse.

...Obama’s budget is just the reverse. The Medicaid expansion and health insurance exchange subsidies included in the Affordable Care Act will be the largest shift of economic resources to the lower half of the income distribution in generations. Even high-profile gestures like Obama’s willingness to reduce Social Security benefits are conditioned on protecting low-income beneficiaries from cuts. Both Obama and Ryan would reduce entitlement spending relative to current projections. Obama does it in a way that makes the distribution of benefits more progressive. Ryan not only cuts more, he structures the cuts to make the benefits less progressive."

And the Top Dollar Money Quote:

Obama’s vision of America really is one in which many people will see their living standards rise thanks to better government benefits rather than higher market wages.

[msongs]

1. obama waging it against the ricH now that is funny nt

[Number23]

2. Got nothing, huh?

[Summer Hathaway]

4. Nuthin'. You called it. n/t

[inchhigh]

7. Got a problem with the article

Written by an idiot about things he doesn't understand. Obama and Ryan are both waging war against the poor. Ryan wants to bomb them. Obama wants to surround them and wait until their supplies run out. I'd guess that somewhere in the author's family tree there was a redcoat who wanted to shoot Benedict Arnold. The difference is that early on Arnold fought FOR the revolution. Obama switched sides (and killed single payer) before the first shot was fired.

[Number23]

8. God, what a stupid post.

[inchhigh]

12. Quite perceptive actually

Yglesias suffers from the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" syndrome. Republicans hate Obama, so he must be good. Obama is not fighting for our side. His vision is clearly one where the big banks and wealthy investors call the shots. On every level he chooses advisers who are "Corporate Friendly" and reformers who are to the right of the vast majority of the Democratic party. There is nothing in this article to support his belief that Obama wants to redistribute from the rich to the poor and the fact the the gap between rich and poor has grown at an increasing rate under Obama would indicate the opposite.

I think Thomas Frank's next book should be "What's the Matter with Liberals - How Conservatives won the Heart of the Democratic Party" because we are becoming that moronic block of voters who can always be counted on to vote against our own interests.

[Number23]

14. So despite the fact that numerous sources have reported that the PROPOSED cuts to SS

come attached with safeguards for the poor, that means nothing because you are wedded to your idea that "Obama is not fighting for our side?"

Even though the global financial crisis, which started before the man was sworn in, is by far the greatest contribution to the growing chasm between rich and poor, this is somehow proof - to you - that Obama is not fighting for our side?

The efforts done to bail out the auto industry, provide many more Americans with health care, and raise taxes for the rich apparently mean nothing.

The article states very clearly that Obama's proposed Medicare expansions, higher taxes for the rich and income support will help the poor. I have no idea why you would so eager to pontificate on a piece that you obviously couldn't be bothered to read.

[inchhigh]

15. I read it

wasn't fooled by it. Again, the article clearly states it, does nothing to support that statement. I have no doubt that he wishes it were true.

The bottom line is that people who receive Social Security are still doing more than the people whose incomes are above the income cap. Hardly redistrubutive.

[Number23]

17. His information with links is clearly much more definitive than anything you've presented

But if it brings you joy to think that the president is actively working against you, then have it. You've proven that information will not change your mind and that you are uninterested in anything that doesn't support your already preconceived and really bizarre notions. You'll fit in splendidly in General Discussion.

The author is a liberal economist. And that what he's saying has been publicized in many other sources speaks to the truth of his words. Perhaps if he was a tad more concerned with "bombs" and "redcoats" you'd be more willing to listen. But you go ahead and think whatever makes you happy to think.

[inchhigh]

20. Three Links

None of them support his argument.


This one says 2/3rd of the pain is paid through cuts to programs:

Close to $600 billion of the $1.8 trillion would come from new revenue -- specifically the cap on itemized deductions and the Buffett Rule.

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/10/news/economy/obama-budget/

This one Argues that there are too many people getting benefits already:

The number of Americans receiving federal disability payments has nearly doubled over the last 15 years. There are towns and counties around the nation where almost 1/4 of adults are on disability.

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/490/trends-with-benefits


This one just plain outright contradicts Yglasias:

Economist Casey B. Mulligan argues that while many of these changes were intended to help people endure economic events and boost the economy, they had the unintended consequence of deepening-if not causing-the recession.

http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/Economics/Labor/?view=usa&ci=9780199942213


Actually, now I'm kinda wondering. Did YOU read the article?

[Number23]

27. Three links which is approximately three more than you posted

And every one of the links support his argument. But I guess you have to be able to actually understand what you're reading in order to get that.

The one from Mulligan absolutely bolsters his (and my own) point that it was the global financial crisis that has been most responsible for the widening gap between the rich and poor, that the regulations designed to help the poor were the ones most negatively impacted by the GFC and have actually exacerbated the plight of poor people. Obama is trying to fix that (in part) by expanding Medicare and insisting that his proposed cuts to SS come with safeguards for the poorest people on it. Is it the perfect catch all? No, but does it prove your ridiculous assertion that the president "isn't working for us?" Not by a long shot.

You are indicative of a most curious behavior on this web site and and among others. Information right in your face that flies in direct contradiction to what you already believe just gets distorted until it fits your ill-informed preconceived notions.

I truly cannot understand how Yglesias' article, as short and to the point as it was, could have confused and bewildered you as much as it did. But then, I don't read everything from a "how is Obama screwing me today?" perspective.

[Isoldeblue]

41. +1000 n/t

[IrishAyes]

35. Tell it now! There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

[grantcart]

22. Obama is instituting the largest increase in Medicare expansion, that is being fought

by the Republicans in the House and in the Republican State legislators and you accuse him of selling out?


Yglesias an idiot?

Yglesias went to high school at The Dalton School in New York City and later attended Harvard University where he studied philosophy.[1] He graduated magna cum laude in 2003. He was editor-in-chief of The Harvard Independent, a weekly newsmagazine, and also wrote for several other campus publications.

Obama a traitor when he is engineering the largest increase in Medicare access in history that is being fought by House Republicans and reactionary governors?

Your invective is rich but your perspective and cognative abilities are only an "inchhigh".

[msongs]

5. expecting people/businesses who benefit the most to pay a fair share is hardly "waging war" nt

[Downwinder]

3. Hey, I'm a non-combatant. Let me find my Geneva card.

Don't shoot me.

[pansypoo53219]

6. no, we are finally fighting back.

[Number23]

9. I don't understand your post, particularly in light of the subject of the OP

[Lordquinton]

11. He means

that the class war has been going on for decades, and that we're finally starting to notice that we've been loosing territory for so long we don't even remember what it is that we've lost (some of us, anyways).

[graham4anything]

10. I as self employed,already have saved now $19,200 from President Obama's health plan.

The savings is revolutionary from the Bush or Ryan health insurance days.

And most people don't see the benefits til next year.

It is truly amazing some are obsessing on a $5 increase in one place,
but overlooking the thousands and thousands of dollars saved in the other place.

speaks to the mi mi mi mi nation.

Wish more people would become informed of the benefits instead of whining over $5 bucks so much.(or $60bucks a year.)

It is also evident that when the loudest whiners whine, they are looking at it through middle class eyes, and not the eyes of the poorest of the poor bottom 20% on the financial market.
It appears the loudest whiners/complainers want it to stop and not seem to care about those with the least.

Because there are 3 classes, not just 2. And nowhere do the whiners have any plan whatsoever for those with the least.
It is just about the mi mi mi mi mi generation.

It is time to call it out.
Now for some, but for all in 2014, having a CHOICE to move from one insurance company to a vastly cheaper alternative monthly will be saving thousands and thousands and thousands
(and those with the least will be given entry into a system they never had the ability to be entered in before).
And will be able to see doctors regularly, not just in emergencies, as such, will also save
thousands in future medical costs.

[freedom fighter jh]

13. I'm also self employed.

Can you explain how Obamacare has saved you money? I'd like to get in on this. My premiums have gone way up in the past two years.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

26. Same here.

250% in the last two years, and I'm on the cheapest most bare bones plan already. I can't even afford to use my insurance.

[graham4anything]

29. This is the Barack Obama group, and there are only positive posts here

you posted anti-Obama posts on other threads
please respect the rules of the SOP-

Statement of Purpose
A safe haven for members of Democratic Underground who support the president and his policies.

and please delete all negative posts and take it to some other section

thank you

[Arctic Dave]

28. Yes. Could you please tell us all.

My friend is having issues with obamacare and how it is interfering with the Jones Act as it is written to provide healthcare for himself.

Much appreciated.

[graham4anything]

30. Please delete your post as it violates the SOP of this group-

you posted anti-Obama posts on other threads
please respect the rules of the SOP-

Statement of Purpose
A safe haven for members of Democratic Underground who support the president and his policies.

and please delete all negative posts and take it to some other section

thank you

[Arctic Dave]

31. I asked a question specifically to you.

You say you have save thousands of dollars with obamacare and I only wish to spread the information to other people who may be interested.

Why are you against small business owners?

[IrishAyes]

36. Oh?

Your first paragraph/sentence and the second are contradictory; the last is antagonistic and derogatory. Take your bitiching where it belongs. If no one else alerts on these hateful messages from you and others and they continue, then I will. Just want you to know. I don't hide behind anonymity.

[Arctic Dave]

37. Thank you hall monitor, I'll keep that in mind.

[IrishAyes]

38. And you don't believe in respecting a group's POS?

Then that makes you a jerk and troglodyte. Hold yourself above me if you wish; you'll only make yourself look more ridiculous than you are already.

[Arctic Dave]

39. What's a troglodyte?

[IrishAyes]

40. Consult your dictionary

[ReRe]

16. This spin is a little late...

... isn't it? The title of the article is suspect, in itself. Unless the author recognizes that it takes two to tango, and assumes that the poor/middle class are starting to fight back. The class war against the middle class/poor begun decades ago.

[Number23]

18. I think the title and the article itself are really quite self-explanatory

[ReRe]

19. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder...

... and respectfully, I personally think the timing of this opinion piece is way off. Where was this guy a week or more ago before the meltdown?

[Number23]

24. He may not have anticipated the panicked frenzy of the responses

Or maybe he wanted to take a second and actually read and research what the proposed cuts were before responding.

Personally, his timing doesn't bother me and I'm not sure why you think it's such an issue.

[Cha]

32. Why is it suspect ? Because it's not true?

On spending, a similar divergence emerges. The Republican budget savages programs for the poor. Medicaid, SNAP, Pell Grants, and other programs serving low-income households are singled out for cuts that are disproportionately large relative to the overall scope of spending cuts.

Obama’s budget is just the reverse. The Medicaid expansion and health insurance exchange subsidies included in the Affordable Care Act will be the largest shift of economic resources to the lower half of the income distribution in generations. Even high-profile gestures like Obama’s willingness to reduce Social Security benefits are conditioned on protecting low-income beneficiaries from cuts. Both Obama and Ryan would reduce entitlement spending relative to current projections. Obama does it in a way that makes the distribution of benefits more progressive. Ryan not only cuts more, he structures the cuts to make the benefits less progressive.

These are facts, ReRe.

[grantcart]

21. this is what I have had a hard time understanding at DU

The clear and present danger to the benefit network is not a change in the COLA for Social Security which has attached supplemental payments for the poor but saving and expanding Medicare and Medicaid.

For most struggling Americans this is the most critical piece of the pie, and the one in the most present danger because it does face a trust fund reduction over the next 10 years, significant enough to mandate automatic cuts in benefits.

People wanted single payer and Medicare is America's single payer plan. Obama is trying to engineer the largest increase of Medicare eligibility in its history and the largest shift of resources "to the lower half".

Thanks for posting one of the most important OPs of the year.

[Number23]

34. "People wanted single payer and Medicare is America's single payer plan."

It blows the mind, doesn't it?? NONE of this makes any sense.

I am not happy with these cuts either. My grandmother is on SS and my mom will probably be on it before too very long. And I may not currently be in the US at the moment (which apparently one or two people here think is terribly important to my credibility as an American for some reason. Hey, who says "expat shaming" is limited to Freepers??!) but this is an issue of importance to me and to my family.

But the frenzied, overheated hysteria on these PROPOSED changes which a) no one expects to pass and b) most importantly, BOEHNER AND OTHER REPUBS HAVE ALREADY SAID THAT THEY WILL NOT SUPPORT is nothing short of bewildering. I can understand people being upset that SS was even used as a bargaining chip even if the president had no intention of ever cutting it, but once again the response just defies logic and reason. You would think that this was the first time SS was on the table judging by the screams. Every 3-5 months, the man gets accused of "wanting to cut SS." And he never does.

I haven't posted any OPs outside of the AA forum in a long time. I've pretty much written DU off and don't remember the last time I could honestly say I enjoyed the place or the majority of the posts. But I don't know, seeing the attack on bigtree and the president in bigtree's thread about the president's speech on gun control just did something.

[just1voice]

23. Your obfuscation, it's obvious

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obfuscate
1
a : darken
b : to make obscure <obfuscate the issue>
2
: confuse <obfuscate the reader>
intransitive verb
: to be evasive, unclear, or confusing
— ob·fus·ca·tion \ˌäb-(ˌ fəs-ˈkā-shən\ noun
— ob·fus·ca·to·ry \äb-ˈfəs-kə-ˌtȯr-ē, əb-\ adjective
See obfuscate defined for English-language learners »
Examples of OBFUSCATE

1. Politicians keep obfuscating the issues.
2. Their explanations only serve to obfuscate and confuse.

[Number23]

25. Hey, great! You learned a new word

The author is a well-known liberal economic writer, not a politician or a member of this administration. And in light of this would have no reason to obfuscate so I can only conclude that you are posting this inane post because obfuscate is a word that you just caught wind of.

And I like how you put the smiley face right in the middle of the definition too. That was adorable.

[Cha]

33. You're being paranoid. These are more facts about what is in the budget.

They don't confuse those who want to look at the whole picture.